pacman::p_load(sf, tidyverse, tmap, spdep, funModeling, ggpubr)Take-home Exercise 2: Regionalisation of Multivariate Water Point Attributes with Non-spatially Constrained and Spatially Constrained Clustering Methods
1 Overview
The process of creating regions is called regionalisation. A regionalisation is a special kind of clustering where the objective is to group observations which are similar in their statistical attributes, but also in their spatial location. In this sense, regionalization embeds the same logic as standard clustering techniques, but also applies a series of geographical constraints. Often, these constraints relate to connectivity: two candidates can only be grouped together in the same region if there exists a path from one member to another member that never leaves the region. These paths often model the spatial relationships in the data, such as contiguity or proximity. However, connectivity does not always need to hold for all regions, and in certain contexts it makes sense to relax connectivity or to impose different types of geographic constraints.
1.1 Getting Started
1.1.1 Load Packages
For our analysis, we will utilize the following packages:
sf - for importing and processing geospatial data,
tidyverse - for importing and processing non-spatial data. In this exercise, readr package will be used for importing wkt data and dplyr package will be used to wrangling the data.
We will run the following code chunk to load the required packages:
1.1.2 Import Data
1.1.2.1 Importing water point data
wp_nga <- read_csv("data/aspatial/WPdx.csv") %>%
filter(`#clean_country_name` == "Nigeria")Thing to learn from the code chunk above:
The original file name is called Water_Point_Data_Exchange_-_PlusWPdx.csv, it has been rename to WPdx.csv for easy encoding.
Instead of using
read.csv()of Base R to import the csv file into R,read_csv()is readr package is used. This is because during the initial data exploration, we notice that there is at least one field name with space between the field name (ie. New Georeferenced Column)The data file contains water point data of many countries. In this study, we are interested on water point in Nigeria on. Hence,
filter()of dplyr is used to extract out records belong to Nigeria only.
Convert wkt data
After the data are imported into R environment, it is a good practice to review both the data structure and the data table if it is in tibble data frame format in R Studio.
Notice that the newly imported tibble data frame (i.e. wp_nga) contains a field called New Georeferenced Column which represent spatial data in a textual format. In fact, this kind of text file is popularly known as Well Known Text in short wkt.
Two steps will be used to convert an asptial data file in wkt format into a sf data frame by using sf.
First, st_as_sfc() of sf package is used to derive a new field called Geometry as shown in the code chunk below.
wp_nga$Geometry <- st_as_sfc(wp_nga$`New Georeferenced Column`)Next, st_sf() will be used to convert the tibble data frame into sf data frame.
wp_nga <- st_sf(wp_nga, crs=4326) %>% st_transform(crs = 26391)
wp_ngaWhen the process completed, a new sf data frame called wp_sf will be created.
1.1.2.2 Importing Nigeria LGA level boundary data
For the purpose of this exercise, shapefile downloaded from geoBoundaries portal will be used.
nga <- st_read(dsn = "data/geospatial",
layer = "nga_admbnda_adm2_osgof_20190417",
crs = 4326) %>%
st_transform(crs = 26391) %>%
select(3:4,8:9,17)Reading layer `nga_admbnda_adm2_osgof_20190417' from data source
`C:\hulwana\ISSS624\Take-Home_Ex\Take-Home_Ex2\data\geospatial'
using driver `ESRI Shapefile'
Simple feature collection with 774 features and 16 fields
Geometry type: MULTIPOLYGON
Dimension: XY
Bounding box: xmin: 2.668534 ymin: 4.273007 xmax: 14.67882 ymax: 13.89442
Geodetic CRS: WGS 841.2 Data Preparation
Before proceeding to the geospatial analysis, we will first prepare the data.
1.2.1 Checking duplicated area names
We will first check if there are any duplicated areas by running the following code chunk:
dup <- nga$ADM2_EN[duplicated(nga$ADM2_EN)]
dup[1] "Bassa" "Ifelodun" "Irepodun" "Nasarawa" "Obi" "Surulere"From the above, we see that areas Bassa, Ifelodun, Irepodun, Nasarawa, Obi and Surulere have duplicated labelling.
We will then plot the duplicated areas to determine to understand where are the areas with duplicated names
dup_areas <- nga %>%
filter(ADM2_EN %in% dup) %>%
select(ADM2_EN, geometry)
state_borders <- nga %>%
select(ADM1_EN, geometry)
tmap_mode("view")
tm_shape(state_borders) +
tm_fill("ADM1_EN") +
tm_shape(dup_areas) +
tm_polygons("ADM2_EN", alpha = 0.08) +
tm_layout(legend.show = FALSE)tmap_mode("plot")
# tm_layout(legend.position=c("center", "center"),
# design.mode =TRUE,
# legend.outside = TRUE,
# legend.outside.size = .3) Upon searching on the web based on the information gathers in nigeriainfopedia, we realized that the duplication in names exist due to areas having similar names in different state. The states at which these areas are located are as follows:
dup_areas_state <- nga %>%
filter(ADM2_EN %in% dup) %>%
select(ADM2_EN, ADM1_EN)
dup_areas_stateSimple feature collection with 12 features and 2 fields
Geometry type: MULTIPOLYGON
Dimension: XY
Bounding box: xmin: 99926.41 ymin: 271934.4 xmax: 729231.7 ymax: 893313
Projected CRS: Minna / Nigeria West Belt
First 10 features:
ADM2_EN ADM1_EN geometry
1 Bassa Kogi MULTIPOLYGON (((555599.8 44...
2 Bassa Plateau MULTIPOLYGON (((704592.8 70...
3 Ifelodun Kwara MULTIPOLYGON (((273735.2 55...
4 Ifelodun Osun MULTIPOLYGON (((255291.7 43...
5 Irepodun Kwara MULTIPOLYGON (((305947.5 46...
6 Irepodun Osun MULTIPOLYGON (((235603 4279...
7 Nasarawa Kano MULTIPOLYGON (((677128.6 89...
8 Nasarawa Nasarawa MULTIPOLYGON (((608258.1 51...
9 Obi Benue MULTIPOLYGON (((663064.8 34...
10 Obi Nasarawa MULTIPOLYGON (((727739.2 48...Since these areas have duplicated names, it might result in an inaccurate analysis, and therefore has to be recoded by executing the following code chunk:
nga$ADM2_EN[nga$ADM2_EN == "Bassa" & nga$ADM1_EN == "Kogi"] <- "Bassa (Kogi)"
nga$ADM2_EN[nga$ADM2_EN == "Bassa" & nga$ADM1_EN == "Plateau"] <- "Bassa (Plateau)"
nga$ADM2_EN[nga$ADM2_EN == "Ifelodun" & nga$ADM1_EN == "Kwara"] <- "Ifelodun (Kwara)"
nga$ADM2_EN[nga$ADM2_EN == "Ifelodun" & nga$ADM1_EN == "Osun"] <- "Ifelodun (Osun)"
nga$ADM2_EN[nga$ADM2_EN == "Irepodun" & nga$ADM1_EN == "Kwara"] <- "Irepodun (Kwara)"
nga$ADM2_EN[nga$ADM2_EN == "Irepodun" & nga$ADM1_EN == "Osun"] <- "Irepodun (Osun)"
nga$ADM2_EN[nga$ADM2_EN == "Nasarawa" & nga$ADM1_EN == "Kano"] <- "Nasarawa (Kano)"
nga$ADM2_EN[nga$ADM2_EN == "Nasarawa" & nga$ADM1_EN == "Nasarawa"] <- "Nasarawa (Nasarawa)"
nga$ADM2_EN[nga$ADM2_EN == "Obi" & nga$ADM1_EN == "Benue"] <- "Obi (Benue)"
nga$ADM2_EN[nga$ADM2_EN == "Obi" & nga$ADM1_EN == "Nasarawa"] <- "Obi (Nasarawa)"
nga$ADM2_EN[nga$ADM2_EN == "Surulere" & nga$ADM1_EN == "Lagos"] <- "Surulere (Lagos)"
nga$ADM2_EN[nga$ADM2_EN == "Surulere" & nga$ADM1_EN == "Oyo"] <- "Surulere (Oyo)"Check if there are duplicated in LGA names after the clean-up
nga$ADM2_EN[duplicated(nga$ADM2_EN)][1] "Bassa" "Ifelodun" "Irepodun" "Nasarawa" "Obi" "Surulere"1.3 Data Wrangling
1.3.1 Extract all the required variables and recode if needed
Since we would like to understand if there are any relation ship on the number of functional and non-functional point, we would need to ensure that the variables required are cleaned. We will first load the data to see what are the fields present by using the glimpse() function.
glimpse(wp_nga)In total there are 71 fields each having 95,008 observations. Thus, we will select only the required columns needed for our analysis.
The data required for our analysis are:
Total number of functional water points
Total number of nonfunctional water points
Percentage of functional water points
Percentage of non-functional water points
Percentage of main water point technology (i.e. Hand Pump)
Percentage of usage capacity (i.e. < 1000, >=1000)
Percentage of rural water points
Thus we will:
Select the columns `#water_tech_category`, `#status_clean` and is_urban
Additional columns selected: `#subjective_quality` and usage_capacity
Tidy the name of variables that starts with “#”
wp_rev <- wp_nga %>%
select(10,22,26,46,47) %>%
rename(`water_tech` = `#water_tech_category`, `status_clean` = `#status_clean`,
`quality` = `#subjective_quality` )Since, we are interested to know how many functional and non-functional taps there are, we execute the following code to count the number of functional and non-functional taps as well as get the percentages of each type of taps.
freq(data=wp_rev,
input = 'status_clean')
status_clean frequency percentage cumulative_perc
1 Functional 45883 48.29 48.29
2 Non-Functional 29385 30.93 79.22
3 Unknown 10656 11.22 90.44
4 Functional but needs repair 4579 4.82 95.26
5 Non-Functional due to dry season 2403 2.53 97.79
6 Functional but not in use 1686 1.77 99.56
7 Abandoned/Decommissioned 234 0.25 99.81
8 Abandoned 175 0.18 99.99
9 Non functional due to dry season 7 0.01 100.001.3.1.1 Recoding NA values into String
We observed that there are more than 10% of observations that are NAs for this field. Thus, we will recode it into ‘Unknown’.
wp_rev <- wp_rev %>%
dplyr::mutate(status_clean =
replace_na(status_clean, "Unknown"))1.3.2 Extracting Water Point Data
We will re-group the water point categories into the following
Unknown
Functional
Non-functional
1.3.2.1 Extracting Water Point with Unknown Class
In the code chunk below, filter() of dplyr is used to select water points with unknown status.
wpt_unknown <- wp_rev %>%
filter(status_clean == "Unknown")1.3.2.2 Extracting Functional Water Point
In the code chunk below, filter() of dplyr is used to select functional water points.
We will consider the following categories as functional water points:
Functional
Functional but not in use
Functional but needs repair
wpt_functional <- wp_rev %>%
filter(status_clean %in%
c("Functional",
"Functional but not in use",
"Functional but needs repair"))1.3.2.3 Extracting Non-Functional Water Point
On the other hand, the following categories, will be grouped as non-functional water points:
Non-Functional
Non-Functional due to dry season
Abandoned/Decommissioned
Abandoned
Non functional due to dry season
wpt_nonfunctional <- wp_rev %>%
filter(status_clean %in%
c("Non-Functional",
"Non-Functional due to dry season",
"Abandoned/Decommissioned",
"Abandoned",
"Non functional due to dry season"))1.3.2.4 Performing Point-in-Polygon Count
To count the number of different categories of water points found by LGA, we will utilize the mutate() function for the calculation as shown in the code:
nga_wp <- nga %>%
mutate(`total wpt` = lengths(
st_intersects(nga, wp_rev))) %>%
mutate(`wpt functional` = lengths(
st_intersects(nga, wpt_functional))) %>%
mutate(`wpt non-functional` = lengths(
st_intersects(nga, wpt_nonfunctional))) %>%
mutate(`wpt unknown` = lengths(
st_intersects(nga, wpt_unknown)))1.3.2.5 Compute the Percentages of Water Points
To compute the percentages of functional and non-functional water points, we execute the following code
nga_wp <- nga_wp %>%
mutate(pct_functional = `wpt functional`/`total wpt`) %>%
mutate(`pct_non-functional` = `wpt non-functional`/`total wpt`)1.3.3 Extracting Water Technology Data
To see what are the different types of water technology present as well as its distribution, we run the following code:
freq(data=wp_rev,
input = 'water_tech')
water_tech frequency percentage cumulative_perc
1 Hand Pump 58755 61.84 61.84
2 Mechanized Pump 25644 26.99 88.83
3 <NA> 10055 10.58 99.41
4 Tapstand 553 0.58 99.99
5 Rope and Bucket 1 0.00 100.00Observed that the dominating type of water technology belongs to the ‘Hand Pump’ category at 61.84% of the water point found in Nigeria. As the number of ‘Mechanized Pump’ is substantially large we will also consider the percentage of this type of water point technology in our analysis. The number of water points that are either ‘Tapstand’ and ‘Rope and Bucket’ is too small and thus will not be considered as a variable in our analysis.
1.3.3.1 Extracting Hand Pump Water Points
wpt_hand <- wp_rev %>%
filter(water_tech == "Hand Pump")1.3.3.2 Extracting Mechanized Pump Water Points
wpt_mechanized <- wp_rev %>%
filter(water_tech == "Mechanized Pump")1.3.3.3 Performing Point-in-Polygon Count
To count the number of different categories of water point techinlogies found in each LGA, we will utilize the mutate() function for the calculation as shown in the code:
nga_wp <- nga_wp %>%
mutate(`wpt hand` = lengths(
st_intersects(nga_wp, wpt_hand))) %>%
mutate(`wpt mechanized` = lengths(
st_intersects(nga_wp, wpt_mechanized)))1.3.3.4 Compute the Percentages of Hand Pump and Mechanized Pump Water Points
To compute the percentages of functional and non-functional water points, we execute the following code
nga_wp <- nga_wp %>%
mutate(pct_hand = `wpt hand`/`total wpt`) %>%
mutate(`pct_mechanized` = `wpt mechanized`/`total wpt`)1.3.4 Extracting Rural and Urban Areas
1.3.4.1 Extract data on rural areas
wpt_rural <- wp_rev %>%
filter(is_urban == FALSE)1.3.4.2 Performing Point-in-Polygon Count
nga_wp <- nga_wp %>%
mutate(`wpt rural` = lengths(
st_intersects(nga_wp, wpt_rural)))1.3.4.3 Compute the Percentages of Rural Areas
nga_wp <- nga_wp %>%
mutate(pct_rural = `wpt rural`/`total wpt`)1.3.5 Extracting Quality
1.3.5.1 Different categories fo quality
freq(data=wp_rev,
input = 'quality')
quality frequency percentage cumulative_perc
1 Acceptable quality 71801 75.57 75.57
2 <NA> 10625 11.18 86.75
3 No because of Taste 6712 7.06 93.81
4 No because of Colour 3986 4.20 98.01
5 No because of Odour 1847 1.94 99.95
6 Within National limits (potable) 19 0.02 99.97
7 Within National standards (potable) 18 0.02 100.001.3.5.2 Acceptable Quality
wpt_acceptable <- wp_rev %>%
filter(quality %in%
c("Acceptable quality",
"Within National standards (potable)",
"Within National limits (potable)"))1.3.5.3 Unacceptable Quality
wpt_unacceptable <- wp_rev %>%
filter(quality %in%
c("No because of Taste",
"No because of Colour",
"No because of Odour"))1.3.5.3 point-in-polygon count
nga_wp <- nga_wp %>%
mutate(`wpt acceptable` = lengths(
st_intersects(nga_wp, wpt_acceptable))) %>%
mutate(`wpt unacceptable` = lengths(
st_intersects(nga_wp, wpt_unacceptable)))1.3.5.4 Calculating percentages
nga_wp <- nga_wp %>%
mutate(pct_acceptable = `wpt acceptable`/`total wpt`) %>%
mutate(pct_unacceptable = `wpt unacceptable`/`total wpt`)1.3.6 Usage Capacity
1.3.6.1 Visualization
freq(data=wp_rev,
input = 'usage_capacity')
usage_capacity frequency percentage cumulative_perc
1 300 68789 72.40 72.40
2 1000 25644 26.99 99.39
3 250 573 0.60 99.99
4 50 2 0.00 100.00We see that there are 2 groups with stubstantial number of observations which are 300 and 1000. Thus, we will recode the groups to those with less than or equal to 300 and more than 300.
1.3.6.2 Less than 300 or equal
wpt_300 <- wp_rev %>%
filter(usage_capacity < 301)1.3.6.3 1000
wpt_1000 <- wp_rev %>%
filter(usage_capacity >= 1000)1.3.6.4 Point in polygon count
nga_wp <- nga_wp %>%
mutate(`wpt 300` = lengths(
st_intersects(nga_wp, wpt_300))) %>%
mutate(`wpt 1000` = lengths(
st_intersects(nga_wp, wpt_1000)))1.3.6.5 Percentages
nga_wp <- nga_wp %>%
mutate(pct_cap300 = `wpt 300`/`total wpt`) %>%
mutate(pct_cap1000 = `wpt 1000`/`total wpt`)1.3.7
We will then save the cleaned data in rds format.
2 Exploratory Data Analysis
2.1 Summary Statistics
Let us review the summary statistics of the newly derived penetration rates using the code chunk below.
summary(nga_wp) ADM2_EN ADM2_PCODE ADM1_EN ADM1_PCODE
Length:774 Length:774 Length:774 Length:774
Class :character Class :character Class :character Class :character
Mode :character Mode :character Mode :character Mode :character
geometry total wpt wpt functional wpt non-functional
MULTIPOLYGON :774 Min. : 0.0 Min. : 0.00 Min. : 0.00
epsg:26391 : 0 1st Qu.: 45.0 1st Qu.: 17.00 1st Qu.: 12.25
+proj=tmer...: 0 Median : 96.0 Median : 45.50 Median : 34.00
Mean :122.7 Mean : 67.36 Mean : 41.60
3rd Qu.:168.8 3rd Qu.: 87.75 3rd Qu.: 60.75
Max. :894.0 Max. :752.00 Max. :278.00
wpt unknown pct_functional pct_non-functional wpt hand
Min. : 0.00 Min. :0.0000 Min. :0.0000 Min. : 0.00
1st Qu.: 0.00 1st Qu.:0.3333 1st Qu.:0.2211 1st Qu.: 6.00
Median : 0.00 Median :0.4792 Median :0.3559 Median : 47.00
Mean : 13.76 Mean :0.5070 Mean :0.3654 Mean : 75.89
3rd Qu.: 17.75 3rd Qu.:0.6749 3rd Qu.:0.5082 3rd Qu.:111.00
Max. :219.00 Max. :1.0000 Max. :1.0000 Max. :764.00
NA's :13 NA's :13
wpt mechanized pct_hand pct_mechanized wpt rural
Min. : 0.00 Min. :0.0000 Min. :0.0000 Min. : 0.00
1st Qu.: 11.00 1st Qu.:0.1860 1st Qu.:0.1250 1st Qu.: 23.00
Median : 25.50 Median :0.5255 Median :0.3193 Median : 64.00
Mean : 33.12 Mean :0.4956 Mean :0.3818 Mean : 97.45
3rd Qu.: 46.00 3rd Qu.:0.7857 3rd Qu.:0.5843 3rd Qu.:141.00
Max. :245.00 Max. :1.0000 Max. :1.0000 Max. :894.00
NA's :13 NA's :13
pct_rural wpt acceptable wpt unacceptable pct_acceptable
Min. :0.0000 Min. : 0.00 Min. : 0.0 Min. :0.0000
1st Qu.:0.5922 1st Qu.: 28.00 1st Qu.: 3.0 1st Qu.:0.5595
Median :0.8717 Median : 71.00 Median : 9.0 Median :0.7759
Mean :0.7395 Mean : 92.79 Mean : 16.2 Mean :0.7172
3rd Qu.:1.0000 3rd Qu.:127.00 3rd Qu.: 21.0 3rd Qu.:0.9221
Max. :1.0000 Max. :833.00 Max. :225.0 Max. :1.0000
NA's :13 NA's :13
pct_unacceptable wpt 300 wpt 1000 pct_cap300
Min. :0.00000 Min. : 0.00 Min. : 0.00 Min. :0.0000
1st Qu.:0.04124 1st Qu.: 16.00 1st Qu.: 11.00 1st Qu.:0.4157
Median :0.10526 Median : 60.00 Median : 25.50 Median :0.6807
Mean :0.15565 Mean : 89.59 Mean : 33.12 Mean :0.6182
3rd Qu.:0.21429 3rd Qu.:127.75 3rd Qu.: 46.00 3rd Qu.:0.8750
Max. :1.00000 Max. :767.00 Max. :245.00 Max. :1.0000
NA's :13 NA's :13
pct_cap1000
Min. :0.0000
1st Qu.:0.1250
Median :0.3193
Mean :0.3818
3rd Qu.:0.5843
Max. :1.0000
NA's :13 2.2 EDA using Histogram
Here, we take a look at the distribution of the percentages variable
functional <- ggplot(data=nga_wp,
aes(x= `pct_functional`)) +
geom_histogram(bins=20,
color="black",
fill="light blue")
nonfunctional <- ggplot(data=nga_wp,
aes(x= `pct_non-functional`)) +
geom_histogram(bins=20,
color="black",
fill="light blue")
hand <- ggplot(data=nga_wp,
aes(x= `pct_hand`)) +
geom_histogram(bins=20,
color="black",
fill="light blue")
mechanized <- ggplot(data=nga_wp,
aes(x= `pct_mechanized`)) +
geom_histogram(bins=20,
color="black",
fill="light blue")
rural <- ggplot(data=nga_wp,
aes(x= `pct_rural`)) +
geom_histogram(bins=20,
color="black",
fill="light blue")
acceptable <- ggplot(data=nga_wp,
aes(x= `pct_acceptable`)) +
geom_histogram(bins=20,
color="black",
fill="light blue")
unacceptable <- ggplot(data=nga_wp,
aes(x= `pct_unacceptable`)) +
geom_histogram(bins=20,
color="black",
fill="light blue")
cap300 <- ggplot(data=nga_wp,
aes(x= `pct_cap300`)) +
geom_histogram(bins=20,
color="black",
fill="light blue")
cap1000 <- ggplot(data=nga_wp,
aes(x= `pct_cap1000`)) +
geom_histogram(bins=20,
color="black",
fill="light blue")
ggarrange(functional, nonfunctional, hand, mechanized, acceptable, unacceptable,
cap300, cap1000, rural,
ncol = 3,
nrow = 3)
Notice that the variables pct_acceptable, pct_cap300 and pct_rural are left skewed. Whereas, variables pct_mechanized, pct_unacceptable and pct_cap1000 are right-skewed.
2.3 EDA using Chloropleth Map
2.3.1 Total Waterpoints
qtm(nga_wp, "total wpt")
From the above map, we notice that there are a number of areas in the north-eastern part of Nigeria in which there 0 data on the number of water points.
2.3.2 Distribution of Functional and Non-functional Water Points by Percentages
tmap_mode("view")
pct_functional <- tm_shape(nga_wp) +
tm_fill("pct_functional") +
tm_borders()
pct_nonfunctional <- tm_shape(nga_wp) +
tm_fill("pct_non-functional") +
tm_borders()
tmap_arrange(pct_functional, pct_nonfunctional,
asp = 1, ncol = 2,
sync = TRUE)tmap_mode("plot")In terms of functional water points, areas in the northern region have high percentages in comparison to other parts in Nigeria, while in terms of non-functional water points, areas in southern part of Nigeria have higher percentages.
2.3.3 Distribution of Hand Pump and Mechanized Pump
tmap_mode("view")
pct_hand <- tm_shape(nga_wp) +
tm_fill("pct_hand", palette = "BuGn") +
tm_borders()
pct_mechanized <- tm_shape(nga_wp) +
tm_fill("pct_mechanized", palette = "BuGn") +
tm_borders()
tmap_arrange(pct_hand, pct_mechanized,
asp = 1, ncol = 2,
sync = TRUE)tmap_mode("plot")We see a similar to that of the distribution of functional and non-functional water points, where the norther regions of Nigeria tend to have higher percentages of hand pump but lower percentage of mechanized pump whereas southern regions of Nigeria tended to have higher percentages of mechanized pumps but lower percentages of hand pumps. Perhaps this could be attributed to the the technology and development of the different regions and therefore will proceed to look if there is a similar trend in terms of rural and urban areas.
2.3.4 Distribution of Rural Areas by Percentages
tmap_mode("view")
tm_shape(nga_wp) +
tm_fill("pct_rural", palette = "YlGn") +
tm_borders(col = "black", lwd = 2)tmap_mode("plot")Surprisingly, in terms of percentage of rural areas, it is almost homogeneous throughout Nigeria.
2.3.5 Distribution of Water Quality by Percentages
tmap_mode("view")
pct_accept <- tm_shape(nga_wp) +
tm_fill("pct_acceptable", palette = "Blues") +
tm_borders()
pct_unaccept <- tm_shape(nga_wp) +
tm_fill("pct_unacceptable", palette = "Blues") +
tm_borders()
tmap_arrange(pct_accept, pct_unaccept,
asp = 1, ncol = 2,
sync = TRUE)tmap_mode("plot")Based on the percentages of acceptable water quality, we see that the the distribution is also quite homogeneous among the areas in Nigeria with majority having high percentage of acceptable water quality.
2.3.6 Distribution of Usage Capacity
tmap_mode("view")
pct_cap300 <- tm_shape(nga_wp) +
tm_fill("pct_cap300", palette = "BuPu") +
tm_borders()
pct_cap1000 <- tm_shape(nga_wp) +
tm_fill("pct_cap1000", palette = "BuPu") +
tm_borders()
tmap_arrange(pct_cap300, pct_cap1000,
asp = 1, ncol = 2,
sync = TRUE)tmap_mode("plot")We observe that the high percentages of usage capacity that is equal or greater than 1000 is prevalent in the southern part of Nigeria and some areas towards the extreme north-western region of Nigeria.